Woman Rides Bicycle to 183.9 MPH, a New World Record

Re:Woman Rides Bicycle to 183.9 MPH, a New World Record by komali2 on Tuesday September 18, 2018 @11:18PM (#18021418)

I wonder if the neck injury thing is just because a "lesser than" injury is actually getting reported? I haven't seen anything in the article about it, but for example iirc there was this hullabaloo about motorcycle helmet data indicating an increase in back injuries for helmet-wearers, until someone pointed out that dead-on-site riders would be reported as simply "dead," with their injuries unaccounted for.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Woman Rides Bicycle to 183.9 MPH, a New World Record by adrianN on Wednesday September 19, 2018 @04:06AM (#18022626)

The helmet sticks out a couple of centimeters and can increase torque if you don't fall straight down. It's plausible that it can cause more serious neck injuries.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Woman Rides Bicycle to 183.9 MPH, a New World Record by abecedarius on Wednesday September 19, 2018 @10:05AM (#18024231)

I've always wondered why they're designed that way -- it looks like it's asking for trouble.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Woman Rides Bicycle to 183.9 MPH, a New World Record by AstralStorm on Friday September 21, 2018 @02:40AM (#18037605)

A flat shell on front and back would not absorb a hit well if at all - and those are relatively common accidents.

Typical fall has the first contact either direct front or direct back based on kinematics which means they're subject to most force. Falling on side of head is somewhat more rare. Falling on top of the head is rare.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Woman Rides Bicycle to 183.9 MPH, a New World Record by Filligree on Wednesday September 19, 2018 @07:32AM (#18023413)

That seems very likely. There was a similar effect for armoring airplanes in WW2, and giving soldiers helmets before then...

At least we usually figure it out. "More injuries because less deaths" is simple enough, I guess.

[ Parent | on HN ]